Stats 24/25 Season

Here is the xG from the N Forest game. For the third week running, we outscored our xG, hopefully ending claims of not being clinical enough, in a game that was far more even then the scoreline showed. AFCB went one nil up in the 9th minute as the N Forest defence backed away from Kluivert, and having run some distance took a shot from 25 yards that nestled in the bottom left corner. (rated 1 in 13). As had been stated, the first goal was likely to be critical as the visitors had shown they were adept at defending an advantage. The rest of the half was nip and tuck, with no real chances. The xG at the break, was AFCB 0.25 N Forest 0.23.

AFCB started the second half with a reasonable chance, with Ouattara heading at Sels (1 in 11) and N Forest immediately countered with Milenkovic seeing a header tipped over by Kepa in what was, at that point, the best chance of the match (1 in 6). Six minutes later it was 2-0, Kluivert hanging a cross up for Ouattara who jumped high to head home (1 in 4). The momentum was with Bournemouth now with Semenyo having a 1 in 10 chance saved, before Ouattara, made his way in the box, and shot across Sels into the far corner to make it 3-0 (1 in 10). As the game progressed, N Forest had 2 quick chances, with Gibbs-White shooting wide from a close-range angle (18%) and Morato having a header blocked (1 in 10) with the xGs remaining similar into the 85th minute. Then, a shot from Tavernier was poorly dealt with by Sels with the rebound falling nicely for Ouattara who was following up to slide it past the keeper (1 in 2). In the final minutes, Semenyo, scored in the far corner threading it through a defenders legs (1 in 20) and Tavernier had a free kick in a dangerous position that went just over (1 in 5). The final xG was AFCB 1.69 N Forest 0.98, with understat having the margin considerably wider, at 2.83 vs 1.00.

xG Timeline.png
 
There were no changes to the team who won at Newcastle, which was unsurprising given the good result and the lack of alternatives. There was a bigger distance between the two centre backs Zabrnyi (27) and Huijsen (2) than normal, with the middle covered by Adams (12) or Christie (10) when the defenders supported the attack bringing the ball forward. The first substitute was in the 81st minute and 3-0, with Tavernier (16) returning from injury replaced Brooks (7) although his position was more central than the right-wing position Brooks had played. In the 87th minute, Jebbison (21) replaced Kluivert (19), presumably playing as centre forward with Ouattara (11) moving to the wing. On 90 minutes Ouattara was withdrawn and Silcott-Duberry (43) given a debut.

Av Pos.jpg
 
Christie had most touches with 64. Kluivert also had most touches in the opposition half (37) and in the final third with 33.

Touches.png

Zabarnyi attempted most passes with 47, although Christie made most successful passes. Christie and Semenyo made joint-most passes in the opposition’s half (22) with Semenyo attempting most in the final third with 19. We averaged 81% pass completion with Brooks, Christie, Ouattara, Huijsen and Kluivert of the starting 11, at over 85%.

All passes.pngPass Opp Half.png
 
AFCB players tried to take on a man 14 times being successful 11 times (Kluivert was successful 4 times out of 6).

Take Ons.png

AFCB players were tackled 12 times with Ouattara being tackled 4 times.

Tackled.png

AFCB attempted 17 crosses, being successful only twice (from Kluivert and Semenyo) although one of these was scored to put us 2-0 up.

Crossing.png
 
AFCB had 33 touches in the opposition’s penalty area with Ouattara having 13. N Forest had 34 touches in our penalty area.

Pen Area Touches.png

AFCB created 9 chances (3 big). N Forest created 12 chances, 1 big. Semenyo created 3 chances.

Chances Created.png

We had 16 attempts (4 big) noting that chances can be provided after saves, deflections or a defensive error and not created. We hit the target108 times. N Forest had 18 attempts, one big and hit the target 4 times. Ouattara and Semenyo had 4 attempts each. The big chances are reported as falling to Ouattara (3) and Semenyo.

Attempts.png
 
AFCB won 8 of 28 aerials duals. Zabarnyi won 2 from 3.

Aerial.png
AFCB won 22 of 29 tackles. Adams won 5 from 5 and Zabarnyi won 4 from 4.

Tackles.png
Huijsen and Zabarnyi made joint-most defensive actions with 14. Huijsen made most interceptions (3), Cook made joint-most recoveries (7) with Kepa. Zabarnyi made most clearances (9) and Huijsen made most blocks (2).

IRCB.png
 
The Opta expected goals had Ouattara as most likely to score (0.95) followed by Semenyo (0.23) and Tavernier (0.22). For expected assists Kluivert was top with 0.43 followed by Semenyo (0.19).

xG and xA.png

The foul count was AFCB 9, N Forest 12. Cook and Kerkez made joint-most fouls (2), with Brooks, Christie and Tavernier all being fouled twice.

Fouls.png

According to Opta, AFCB made no errors leading to a chance.
 
Interesting to see the average position play out again as it was seen on the pitch.

Back to back weeks as the number 9 for Dango but played the position completely differently in those two games.
 
Interesting to see the average position play out again as it was seen on the pitch.

Back to back weeks as the number 9 for Dango but played the position completely differently in those two games.
I don't think it is necessarily a Dango thing. Here's the last 9 games, with a combination of Evanilson, Dango and Unal starting. Quite often the centre-forward isn't the most advanced player in a Iraola team. Sorry for picture quality.

Capture .jpg
 
I don't think it is necessarily a Dango thing. Here's the last 9 games, with a combination of Evanilson, Dango and Unal starting. Quite often the centre-forward isn't the most advanced player in a Iraola team. Sorry for picture quality.

View attachment 16768

Completely agree. It was a comment about a discussion around Dango from last week. The number 9 role whether it’s Dango or Evanilson is one that tactically is very important to the way we play.
 
Forty points from 23 League matches is about 9.5 ahead of this 51-point pace:
1737935825834.png
The Opta points prediction, which I will re-visit tomorrow after the weekend matches are included, is even rosier, about 62 points. As for what I thought would be a leaner Block IV, AFCB have won 10 points from the first 4 matches. The Opta expected points figure for those, based on their match predictions, was 5.3. (My model's expected points was 5.7.)
 
Both xG and xGA from Saturday's dismantling of Forest are quite typical for this season:
1737936621334.png
1737936649935.png
These figures help illuminate some of the limitations of xG calculations. Is an open shot from this month's Justin Kluivert from 25 yards, no opponent closing him down, really a 1 in 13 (or whatever) proposition? I say probably not, because by definition that's the probability for the average Premier League player who takes a shot from that position.
I do find it very interesting to compare expected vs. actual results, over time and across the League, which is what some of the Opta tables do. I will have a closer look at those tomorrow.
 
Well Justin scored almost exactly the same goal in successive weeks against Newcastle and Notts Forest. If that is a 1 in 13 chance he is going to have to miss an awful lot of similar chances in the next couple of seasons.

I’d argue that quite a few shots lashed towards goal from 25 yards are actually defensive, following corners or free kicks when the defending team is threatening to break quickly so it is better for the attacking player to take a wild shot than to risk a short pass.

That isn’t to criticise xG etc statistics. Just to say that you have to temper them with a qualitative judgement. Not all shots from 25 yards are the same.
 
Well Justin scored almost exactly the same goal in successive weeks against Newcastle and Notts Forest. If that is a 1 in 13 chance he is going to have to miss an awful lot of similar chances in the next couple of seasons.

I’d argue that quite a few shots lashed towards goal from 25 yards are actually defensive, following corners or free kicks when the defending team is threatening to break quickly so it is better for the attacking player to take a wild shot than to risk a short pass.

That isn’t to criticise xG etc statistics. Just to say that you have to temper them with a qualitative judgement. Not all shots from 25 yards are the same.
I think we are having a heated agreement.
 
Well Justin scored almost exactly the same goal in successive weeks against Newcastle and Notts Forest. If that is a 1 in 13 chance he is going to have to miss an awful lot of similar chances in the next couple of seasons.

I’d argue that quite a few shots lashed towards goal from 25 yards are actually defensive, following corners or free kicks when the defending team is threatening to break quickly so it is better for the attacking player to take a wild shot than to risk a short pass.

That isn’t to criticise xG etc statistics. Just to say that you have to temper them with a qualitative judgement. Not all shots from 25 yards are the same.
The model is a bit more complex and will consider a lot of the goal is blocked by players, the ball needs to travel through the gap between the two defenders and then beat the 'keeper who is positioned (IMO) pretty well.
1737968285045.png

The model will only consider the league average and not the individual player. This means if JK is particularly proficient at these types of opportunities you would expect him to overperform his xG. Also scoring twice from similar situations doesn't make him less likely to score from there in future, if anything it could be evidence that he's quite good at those kinds of shots.

You are correct, also that shots from there can be used defensively from a corner but you would expect a much more congested box which I would expect the model to manage.

It's something I've been thinking about with us underperforming generally against xG. I wonder if the style of football means we're getting players in situations where we can (and do) take shots but those situations are frequently not where the player taking them is strongest.
 
Is there some kind of anomaly taking place this season? If xG worked as you'd expect then you'd think it would deliver an approximate balance of 0 if you added up the xG total for all the teams.

Not exact I know but as a rough figure it should be approaching zero since that's the principle behind it. Some teams would overperform and some underperform and, with some deviation from the average, the cumulative total would be dragged towards a neutralish figure.

Yet look at the table for this season so far:

1737970129117.png

Only three teams are overperforming and the total is cumulative is 73.67 fewer goals than expected - or an average about 3.7 goals per club under the expected total.

Seems a bit odd. Either something is out with the model or there's something strange going on. Any thoughts @Matt Stevenson as our resident expert?

Or is it like this every season? Doesn't make sense to me if that's the case.
 

;